The Nation Newspaper

Category: Building & Properties

  • ‘Lagos needs N400b to protect its coastline’

    ‘Lagos needs N400b to protect its coastline’

    Many believe that the Eko Atlantic City belongs to the Lagos State government. But the Commissioner for Waterfront and Infrastructure Development, Prince Adesegun Oniru, whose ministry oversees the project, says the state is only playing a supervisory role on the private initiative. He spoke with Seyi Odewale.

     

    Who are the true owners of Eko Atlantic City?

    The owner of Eko Atlantic City is called South Energyx Nigeria Limited. The role being played by the Lagos State government is supervisory

    South Energyx was given a 78-year Certificate of Occupancy to own the place. Eko Atlantic came into being as a result of ocean surges, which usually happen at the Lagos Bar Beach. They are a thing of the past. The state spent money to put a permanent solution to it as it were, in 2005/2006 to protect Victoria Island (VI) from flooding and regular ocean surge.

    And the next phase after this is to reclaim what was lost to the Atlantic Ocean. And purely, that is what Eko Atlantic City is all about, to reclaim back what had been lost to the Atlantic Ocean and to develop it to decongest Victoria Island from the commercial activities that are going on there now.

    Can you give an update on the City?

    The state of things in the Atlantic City is that the city has reclaimed beyond five million square metres of land. When it reached five million square metres of land, former United States (US) President, Bill Clinton was invited to showcase what we have done. As far as everyday development is concerned, the first building is being constructed. They are now pilling. Secondly, infrastructure works are on-going. These include roads, drainage and other key things.

    The city is developing and allottees are being given their land of various sizes in the city. This is a plus for Lagos State and this is a big-plus for developers that are spending money to develop the city.

    Is there a time frame for the development of the city?

    There is nothing to do with time that does not have financial aspect to it. The developer, like I said, has 78 years, so the onus is on that developer to ensure that the city is developed on time. We cannot control the pace of development in the area. Ours is to ensure that all we agreed upon are adhered to.

    Will those that own plots in the city be given a tax holiday?

    The city in question is within Lagos State. There are rules and regulations to be adhered to if you must live in Lagos. And because that city is still within Lagos, there will be no concession whatsoever. And the State has no right to grant that concession. But as it is now, the area is part of Lagos State and people should have it at the back of their minds that there is nothing we are doing in Eko Atlantic City. We are only reclaiming the lost part of the land to build it. We are not going beyond the boundary of Lagos State.

    For instance, if you are going to construct on the city, you will still seek approvals like everybody else. The only difference is that the developer collects the funds on behalf of government and remits same to government. That was what we agreed upon in the signed agreement with the firm.

    How correct is it that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on the city, came much later after dredging and piling had begun?

    It is good that you asked this and everything you talked about is not correct. I would start by letting you know that for a project like that, covering about 10 million square metres, it will not require a single EIA. The EIA for such a project is a continuous exercise. There will be EIA for starting the work, there will be EIA for reclamation and there will be EIA for the general layout of the area. This is because some people claimed that they were living in the area before the work commenced there. How can this be possible?

    The whole place was full of water about 15 metres deep, so how can people be residing in this kind of place? Nothing was fast-tracked. The company that did the EIA and the Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) is from Holland. They did the work in conjunction with Lagos State Ministry of Waterfront and Infrastructure Development and the Federal Government.

    How far has Lagos State gone about climate change and coastline protection?

    Before I tell you about how far we have gone, the figure I referred to when I delivered a lecture on climate change at the Nigerian Civil Engineers’ event where I talked about what would be needed to resolve the problem in Lagos, what would be needed actually is to resolve the problem we have in the east commodore channel. The Commodore Channel is where vessels coming to our ports in Lagos, Apapa and Tin Can use. It is between Eko Atlantic City and the Takwa Bay.

    Everything east of that is where we have a major issue with the Atlantic Ocean simply because the natural flow of sand is being disturbed by the construction of moles in that area, especially the west mole. The west mole is the one at the light house on the other side of Takwa Bay that is stopping sand from reaching the Bar Beach and beyond.

    When this strong surge is coming, the problem you have is that as it comes in and it is taking the sand away, nothing is coming back from the Bight of Benin to nourish that side of the Atlantic. These are the areas that we have problems with.

    From that area to the boundary of Lagos State with the next state, Ogun, we have about 87 Kilometres to look after. The project you are talking about is only covering about 7 ½ Kilometres of that coastline. And Eko Atlantic City project covers 7 ½ Kilometres from the Bar Beach all the way to just before Goshen Estate where the project ends.

    But like any responsible government, you cannot leave everywhere exposed, so the work we are doing now is another 7 ½ kilometres that takes you to Alpha Beach and beyond. It is what we are working on with HITECH the contractor in charge; that is the development that is going into the Atlantic, especially with the use of the groins as described.

    The groin goes into the Atlantic. When the waves come, it traps sand and sand accumulates to replenish the ones lost to the surge in that area. But beyond that, we are still going to have problems because of climate change, change in the sea level and the current activities that go on under the water that take the sand away.

    So, unless we have a way of artificially bringing sand to protect the area, we must continue what the government is doing now. As it is now, based on the costs incurred so far on the 7 ½ Kilometres, we will need nothing less than N400billion to protect the rest of the state.

    The interesting thing is that it is not just Lagos State anymore. We have eight other states that have border with the Atlantic with a distance of 853 Kilometres of coastline in Nigeria. Out of that distance, Lagos State only has 186 Kilometres of it. And our troubled area as it were, that we must look after is about 87 Kilometres after the completion of Eko Atlantic City.

    After that lecture the American Embassy wanted to see me and I went to them the next day. And it is amazing what was being said to me. They told me that they have been looking for someone to champion the cause of protecting the coastline since 2008, but everybody they contacted at the Federal level never came back to them. They asked if I was willing to champion the cause for Nigeria.

    My answer to them was that let me resolve the problem of Lagos State first and then we can talk about Nigeria. It is obvious that we have problems along our coastline in Nigeria. And that problem is not peculiar to Lagos alone. And what do I mean by that? The Atlantic coastline is a national boundary. So why should any state dissipate so much energy on this problem?

    My plea to the Federal Government is to make funds available to the littoral states to combat this problem. You have millions of readers you can help make the noise about the coastal erosion that I’m talking about. That was what my lecture was all about. I just used Lagos as a case study.

    If we don’t do anything about it the problem will continue and everybody that resides with that Atlantic waterfront will suffer and more, particularly people who cannot afford to protect their property. So the call is again to the Federal Government to make special provision in the annual budget for littoral states to protect the coastline.

    Looking at the ecological fund how far has it helped and what is the level of collaboration with other states faced with this problem?

    The simplest answer to your question is no, no collaboration. This is because as far as I know, this is the only state that has a ministry for waterfront. Number two, it should not be my lot to be talking to other commissioners in the states that borders the Atlantic Ocean. A couple of years ago, we had a major disaster at the Alpha Beach, It was so bad that Mr President came, he was shocked by what he saw, a whole community was wiped out. He made a promise that he would do something for Lagos State with ecological fund and any other help that the Federal Government could render. Well, maybe the help would come tomorrow.

  • Families’ land tussle shifts to Appeal Court

    Families’ land tussle shifts to Appeal Court

    A parcel of land measuring 117.188 hectares in Itele-Aiyetoro, Ado-Odo/Ota Local Government Area of Ogun State was given last October to a family, courtesy of an Ijebu-Ode High Court verdict.The same family also got the statutory/customary right of occupancy. The other family in the dispute claims the judge erred in law and it is challenging the verdict at the Court of Appeal in Ibadan, Oyo State, reports Seyi Odewale.

    The Appeal Court in Ibadan has been asked to set aside the October 8 verdict of an Ijebu-Ode High Court in Ogun State, that about 117.188 hectares of land in Itele-Aiyetoro community of Ado-Odo/Ota Local Government Area of the state, belongs to the Adogun Atele family, and not the Odutala family.

    The said judgment was based on suit numbers HCT/7/89 and HCT/212/96, which were consolidated in 2001. Justice O. A. Onafowokan heard the consolidated suits.

    The grounds of the appeal, according to the family represented by the trio of Mr Abiodun Adeniji Odutala, Mrs Fola Adeniji Odutala and Mrs Agbeke Adeniji Odutala, are that, “the learned trial judge erred in law in holding that the appellants’ family are customary tenants to the respondents’ family in the absence of oral and documentary evidence to buttress same”.

    They claimed that “there must be direct or circumstantial evidence before the court to substantiate the allegation that the appellants’family are customary tenants;

    That: “No cogent evidence was adduced by the respondents’ family as their customary tenants.”

    The judge, they said, “erred in law in failing to evaluate the entire evidence adduced before the court, or properly before entering judgment for the respondents by granting all their prayers;

    “The trial judge failed to consider the documentary evidence adduced by the appellants to prove their defence and counter-claim.

    “The learned trial judge misdirected himself of the laws and facts in arriving at his decision and that the judgment is against the weight of evidence.”

    They are seeking these reliefs: “An order setting aside the judgment of the Ogun State High Court, Ijebu-Ode Division delivered on October 8, 2013, and an order granting judgment to the appellants as per their counter-claim before the lower court.” No date has been fixed for the hearing.

    In the first suit, Chiefs Taoridi Dada and Edun Olowookere, on behalf of themselves and Adogun Atele family, sued the Odutalas and five others representing the whole village of Itele-Aiyetoro, otherwise known as Alagbeji Descendants family of Itele-Aiyeitoro village.

    The second suit was between Saibu Olugbode, Chief Kafaru Arowolo, Ayuba Dada and Bili Dabiri, representing themselves and the Alagbeji Descendants family of the same community, and Chiefs Dada and Olowookere, (representing Adogun Atele family) and the Odutalas.

    In his judgment, Justice Onafowokan held: “This is the judgment in two cases that were consolidated to be heard together. The two cases were filed long before I became a judge of the High Court of Ogun State in October 2000, but the lot to hear and determine them fell on me sometime in 2005, when the cases were assigned to my court.

    “The trial started in 2006. My involvement in election petitions assignments in Zamfara and Kano states in 2007 and 2008, and transfers in 2008 and 2011 from one judicial division of the High Court to another with attendant consequences, in my view, contributed greatly to the delay in early conclusion of the trial.”

    The judge said: “The first case, HCT/7/89 was originally commenced by Chief Oluwole Akapo and Madam Owotolu (for themselves and on behalf of the Atele family) against Abiodun Odutala and Madam Agbeke Odutala, claiming damages for trespass and injunction. In the course of the proceedings, the predecessors in the title of the claimants in HCT/212/96, on their applications, were on March, 1989, joined as the 4th to 8th defendants (for themselves and on behalf of Itele Community).

    “Notwithstanding their joinder, they proceeded to institute another action in Suit No: HCT/212/96; this time, suing for themselves and on behalf of members of Itele people, otherwise altogether known as Ogungbemi Alagbeji descendants’ family against the plaintiffs and 1st to 3rd defendants in HCT/7/89.”

    In the first suit (Suit HCT/7/89), according to the judge, the plaintiffs declared, as opposed to those of the defendants, that they “are the persons entitled to customary/statutory rights of occupancy in respect of the vast area of the land situate, lying and being at Aiyetoro Village, Itele in Ogun State of Nigeria, which is more particularly described on plan no. PEG/06/2001/025 dated 28/12/2001 drawn by J.O Olorunkunle (registered surveyor);

    “That the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants are customary tenants of the plaintiffs on the land in dispute.”

    They then wanted “an order for forfeiture of the customary tenancy of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants or of whatever interest or interests they have in the land in dispute on the ground that they have committed acts inconsistent with and in defiance of the plaintiffs’ title to the land in dispute;

    “An order for recovery of possession of the land in dispute from the 1st , 2nd and 3rd defendants by denying the title of the plaintiffs to the land in dispute and by selling and leasing part of thereof, and by various other forms of misconduct;

    “A declaration that all sales, leases or purported sales or any other forms of alienation made by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants affecting the land in dispute is null and void and

    “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants-their privies, servants or agents from further selling or leasing the land in dispute or any portion thereof or from going on the said land for any purpose at all or from doing anything whatsoever on it.”

    In the 1st to 3rd defendants’ counter claims against the plaintiffs and the 4th to 8th defendants (Kafaru Abudu Arowolo, Chief Raufu Ilo (Baale of Itele), Mr Saibu Olugbode, Mr Ayuba Dada and Mr Bili Dabiri), claimed “that they are trustees of Odutala family and are entitled to the issuance of the statutory/customary right of occupancy in respect of that area of land situate and being in Aiyetoro and described and delineated by Survey Plan No OGE/ABB/90 prepared by S. Akin Ogunbiyi Esq. Licensed Surveyor on 20/9/90 and known as parcel A,B and C (measuring respectively 88.294 hectares; 2.511 hectares and 26.383 hectares)”;

    “A declaration that the claimants nor the 4th to 8th defendants have any title to the area claimed by the 1st to 3rd defendants.”

    They then sought “a million naira damages against the claimants and the 4th to 8th defendants for trespass committed on the land” and “a perpetual injunction restraining the claimants, the 4th to 8th defendants, their servants, agents and/or privies from further committing acts of trespass on the land”.

    The 4th to 8th defendants also filed their counter claims against both the plaintiffs and the 1st to 3rd defendants. Against the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs, they declared that “the ‘Itele people’ described in another Suit No. 17/43-Alimi Akapo and others versus D.D Olukogbon “are the ten branches of the 4th to 8th defendants’ families in Suit No HCT/212/96, comprising (1) Ipotobo families (2) Iliwo families (3) Isunba families (4) Ijaganna families (5) Ilekemo families (6) Ilegbede families (7) Ilogun families (8) Isalu families (9) Idotele families and (10) Idomo families called ‘Itele people’ who are otherwise all together known as Alagbeji Descendants family of Itele town.”

    They declared: “The first plaintiff (Jimoh Arowolo) is not a blood relation, nor a family member of any of the 10 units of families known and described as ‘Itele people’ (the owner of Itele Village and its vast area of land), who are otherwise altogether referred to as Alagbeji descendants’ family of Itele town.” There were other declarations by them.

    They then sought the “forfeiture of the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs’ customary rights in Itele village for denying the plaintiffs’ family title of Itele village/town and its whole land.”

    They also sought an “order of possession (by the 4th to 8th defendants) of any portion of land held by the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs within the said entire Itele land as in Survey Plan no. BAC/44/OG/97.”

    In their claims against the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants (Abiodun Odutala, Mrs Fola Adeniji Odutala and Mrs Agbeke Adeniji Odutala), they declared that their ancestor, Erigi Odutala is a customary tenant of the 4th to 8th defendants;

    That: “First, second and third defendants are not entitled to any statutory right of occupancy in respect of any portion or parcel of land situate, lying and being at Aiyetoro Village which formed part of the whole land belonging to the 4th to 8th defendants as landlords of the said 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants.” All these, among others, were the prayers sought by them at the lower court.”

    When The Nation visited the town there was unease. Some people spoke in hushed tones, others expressed fear that the victorious family could ask them to vacate the land, especially, when Chief Abiodun Adeniji Bada –Odutala (1st defendant) has been asked to stop parading himself as the head of the community.

    “Properties are at a risk, not only our lives,” said Adewumi Adeniji, a resident. “We heard that the opponents had hatched their plans to destroy landed property built here, but I am promising you that they will not go far as we have all documents to back our landed property up,” he added.

    Another resident said: ”I have been living here with my family members for seven years and there was peace until recently when some hoodlums are saying we must vacate our land and relocate to another place because our community head had lost the case. Are we going to leave here and relocate to another area or where are we going to?”

    But the Baale appeared not disturbed by the judgment. “I have gone to the Appeal Court to appeal the case because the judgment of the High Court was improper and could be a mistake. It was the Alake of Egbaland who made me the community head of Ayetoro-Itele  and  seven  months after  my installation  the Olota  of Ota made one Edun Sunday Olowokere,  who is an Awori the head of Ayetoro to cause confusion. I am the 8th Baale, and this Olowokere was the first to be pronounced as Baale.

    “They tell a lot of lies against us. All what Olowokere said in some newspapers are tissues of lies. The Egba own Aiyetoro by conquest and history is there for all to see. Alake is still alive to testify to this. I have never heard how a tenant becomes a landlord,” he said.

    “This town has been in existence for about two centuries, having been founded by the Egba warriors known as the Ajagunnas between 1836 and 1842 and for a judgment to now tell us that we are tenants to people whom we had never paid any tribute to and no demand of such had ever been made; for any judge to say we are tenants on our land is not acceptable and we believe it is a rape of justice. And that is why we are pursuing the matter legally to the highest level the law can take us,” he added.

  • Firm sells estate celebrities

    REAL estate firm, Haven Homes Limited, has secured a two-year off plan commitments from prospective buyers to exercise patience to get delivery of the homes of their choice.

    The deal, according to its Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Mr Tayo Sonuga, is coming at a time when the property market appears saturated with varying high end products on the shelves begging to be purchased and many developers getting stuck and having their investments tied down owing to poor demand.

    Sonuga, who in a statement, said his firm achieved the remarkable feat on his prime estate, Richmond Gate located at Alma Beach in the Lekki Peninsula, Lagos.

    “We are deeply humbled by the soaring demand for our houses which have become very appealing among the celebrity class, but it does not come to us as surprise, because the pattern has been building up over the years with our home brand. To have celebrities queuing up for our products is absolutely humbling and remarkable,” he said.

    He said his firm’s appealing brand has enabled the firm grow tremendous good will to consistently roll out units off plan on several projects over the years. “The difference this time is that whilst previous developments were on smaller scale, Richmond Gate comprising 50 units of four-bedroom homes built in two phases is of a higher magnitude,” he said.

    On whether his firm would deliver the houses on time, he said: “That’s not a problem at all. We will meet every request at the time we promised. However, being signature homes, we do not hurry through our projects, but we can expand our scope of operations to cope with increased demand. In any case, our houses are worth waiting for because we always aim to satisfy our home owners.”

    Two celebrities, he said, have already had their homes delivered to them. “We have successfully delivered home units purchased by our roving ambassador and musical artiste, 2Face Idibia and popular Comedian, Ay,” he said.

  • $2.9tr needed for infrastructure, say experts

    $2.9tr needed for infrastructure, say experts

    Governments have been urged to focus more on packaging good deals that can attract private financing rather than seek to contribute land or provide cash equity participation in Private-Public Partnerships (PPP). They should also play leading roles in subsidising user fees where they are unaffordable or could be severely resisted. This was part of the communiqué by the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS) at its 25th Biennial Conference in Abuja.

    The conference, which witnessed a change of leadership in its executive, noted that there is a direct link between the quality of life and the quality of infrastructure. “Nigeria is poor because it lacks infrastructure, it doesn’t lack infrastructure because it is poor,” the body said.

    It noted that the gap between the nation’s infrastructure endowment and what is required to attract investment, undertake competitive economic activities and provide jobs, is calculated at $2.9trillion and PPP can make a significant contribution to closing the gap by creating wealth and improving the quality of life of Nigerians.

    The principal causes of the failure of PPPs in Nigeria, the body observed, have been lack of transparency in procurement, deficient procurement and poor project packaging. “Nevertheless, there are many successful PPPs in Nigeria through which useful assets have been built and useful services are being delivered,” they said.

    They said PPPs could help reduce corruption in infrastructure procurement because many more parties are involved. These parties, according to them, include government, developers, financiers, users and others.

    “All parties normally have access to all information-pricing, technical specifications, quality standards, etc. Furthermore, private financiers have no interest in over-paying for construction work. Private infrastructure investors also have an incentive to complete projects on time and not invest in projects that will be abandoned as they cannot change users for projects until they are completed,” they said.

    Noting that the flow of investment into core or hard infrastructure from the country’s financial sector has been poor, the nation, they said, requires an infrastructure bank that will through active government support, raise long-term lower interest funds through bonds and other instruments for investment in infrastructure. Telecommunication and oil and gas sectors, they noted, have attracted 84 per cent of the $100 billion raised by Nigerian banks through syndication between 2008 and 2013.

    Quantity surveyors (QS), they said, should be involved in PPP projects in order to assure the public of transparency and value-for-money. The QS as cost economics and managers of cost and quality on construction projects play a critical role in project planning and execution in all economies where PPPs are transparently packaged and successfully delivered.

    The new executives of the body are being led by Mallam Murtala Aliyu as president; Mrs Mercy Iyortyer as deputy president; Mr Gbemibo Ogunfidodo as vice president and Mr Femi Balogun as the secretary-general.

    Others on the executive include Mr Ruya Fadason, who will serve as treasurer; Mr Jide Oke – secretary, marketing/corporate affairs; Mr Kolapo Adeyemo-secretary, International Affairs; Mr Ejike Anosike-secretary, professional development/library and Mallam Abubakar Alkali, Assistant Secretary-General.

    Mallam Aliyu in his acceptance speech said the body will enhance interface with national political institutions as developments in today’s world are driven by sensible investor friendly national policies.

    The body, he said, would also interface with the general public in order to improve public perception of the profession and what the body can offer.

    “We will work with other professional bodies to ensure we project collective capacity of our professionals for nation development to train and enhance the capacity of our various members to enable us compete favourably in the global market,” he said.

  • Commission, borehole drillers seek safer environment

    Members of the Association of Water Well Drilling Rig owners and Practitioners (AWDROP) have pledged to cooperate with the Lagos State Water Regulatory Commission (LSWRC) to curb indiscriminate drilling of boreholes.

    The association President, Michael Ale, who led members of his executives to the Commission in Lagos, reiterated the need to standardise the sector, because Nigerians deserve the best in terms of water consumption.

    He stated that 97 per cent of fresh water is found under the ground and can only be accessed through drilling. He then called for effective patronage of services of borehole drilling professional contractors. This, according to him, would help the country meet the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals.

    The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of LSWRC, Mrs. Tanwa Koya, while soliciting co-operation of the association, said it is part of the commission’s mandate to regulate borehole drilling activities in the state, taking into cognizance people’s health and environmental safety.

    Koya, whose agency is saddled with ensuring proper delivery of water supply and sewerage (waste water management services) in Lagos State, said effective collaboration between both parties would ensure that the sector is fully sanitised, adding that more of such collaborations would be pursued for the commission to achieve its mandate.

  • Abuja estate allottees lose damages battle

    Abuja estate allottees lose damages battle

    One year after their houses were demolished at the Minanuel Estate in Abuja, the owners have lost their battle for N5billion compensation. The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court held that they are not entitled to compensation. Eric Ikhilae reports.

     

    Determined to overcome their accommodation challenge in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), about 400 Nigerians keyed into an opportunity provided by a real estate firm, Minanuel Investment Limited (MIL), which promised to deliver affordable houses to them.

    They subscribed to the scheme, believing that all was well. They committed their money and time into the project; some even took bank loans.

    By mid last year, a beautiful residential estate had emerged, with most of the buildings reaching between 85 and 90 per cent completion. In all, about 372 housing units, comprising 226 units of two-bedroom semi-detached bungalows, and 146 units of detached three-bedroom bungalows, were built.

    The subscribers to the estate, strategically located on the Abuja Airport Road, Lugbe Extension 1, were counting weeks to take possession of their properties, when agents of the  state moved in on September 29 and 30 and October 1, last year, demolishing all that they had laboured for.

    Officials of the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA) and agents of the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA), acting under the instruction of the FCT Minister, Bala Mohammed, claimed that the houses violated all known rules, including the land on which the estate stands. To him, the land was wrongly acquired.

    Determined to ensure a redress, the subscribers, represented by the project’s handler, MIL,  headed for the FCT High Court through its parent body,  NCR Associates Limited. It sought, among others, that the wrong done to them by the FCDA be redressed. Also sued were the FCT Minister, FCTA and FCDA.

    It was the case of the plaintiffs that the land identified as plots ED1425, ED1427, ED1428, ED1429 and ED1430 was acquired in 2000 by a company, NCR Associates Limited by virtue of letters of offer of statutory rights of occupancy obtained through the Abuja Municipal Area Council.

    They stated that the practice then was that officials of the FCDA were stationed at the various Area Councils as Zonal Managers, who issued and signed statutory rights of occupancy on behalf of the FCT Minister.

    NCR, having been legitimately allocated the land, executed a power of attorney in favour of MIL for developing the land into a housing estate.  MIL said it applied for building plan approvals through the Abuja Municipal Council and that the approvals were granted in 2004.

    Armed with the building approvals, MIL, working with subscribers’ funds, swung into action and commenced development of the housing estate. Between 2004 and 2012, it had successfully constructed within the estate, paved roads, sewage system and other needed infrastructural facilities.

    The plaintiff stated that throughout the long period of time that construction works were in progress, no officials of the defendants came to them to complain or warned that the project violated any known laws.

    “The houses were nearing completion, when on, or about September 28, 2012, the plaintiff heard a public announcement on radio stations made by the Senate Committee on FCT, informing the general public that the land on which the plaintiff’s estate is situated had been allocated to members of the National Assembly and that the plaintiff should appear before the Committee on October 2, 2012 with evidence of building approval from the relevant authorities.”

    It stated that before the date it was asked to appear before the Senate committee, agents of the FCT Minister, armed with bulldozers, lorry loads of armed policemen and thugs, descended on the estate between September 29 and October 1 and reduced it to rubbles.

    The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Chris Uche (SAN), said prior to the demolition, the defendants did not serve the plaintiff with any statutory notices and did not afford the plaintiff any opportunity to be heard as required under Section 84 of the Nigerian Regional and Urban Planning Act.

    That there was a lie to the actual motive of the FCT in demolishing the estate, which became evident mid-way into trial, when the plaintiff, provided evidence to the effect that even while proceedings had commenced, the FCT proceeded to reallocate the land to some unknown individuals.

    The plaintiff, who insisted that the allocation was a farce, intended to support the FCT’s plan to foist on the court a state of helplessness, observed that the purported reallocation papers had the same date, November 18 last year, and similar addresses.

    “For instance, Plot 2105 was allocated to Stella Siki of 53 Kumasi Crescent, Wuse 11, Abuja while plot 2224 was allocated to Ala Furo of the same address. Plot 2182 was purportedly allocated to Paul John of the same 53 Kumasi Crescent, Wuse 11.

    There were also the allocation of plot 2190 to Kalamba Koko, plot 2250 to Ibufuro George and plot 2129 to Pat Tugbo all of the same address of 512 Kumasi Crescent, Wuse 11,” Uche said.

    The plaintiff, who argued that the demolition was done in bad faith, wondered why the FCT did not acquire the project that was nearing completion, rather than engage in unwarranted demolition of 372 built housing units, in a city where majority are homeless and housing constitutes a major challenge to inhabitants.

    It prayed the court for N5billion compensation to be awarded as damages against the defendants.

    However, the defendants in their defence denied any wrong doing. They insisted that they acted within their powers and that due process was observed in the steps leading to the demolition.

    Represented by Joe Gadzama (SAN), they claimed to have served the plaintiff all the necessary pre-demolition notices. They blamed the plaintiff for allegedly failing to obtain the necessary approvals before engaging in the development of the project.

    After entertaining arguments from parties, Justice Danlami Senchi gave his verdict on November 11, this year. He upheld the demolition of the private estate by the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA) in a judgment that left hundreds of subscribers to the project devastated.

    Justice Senchi held that the plaintiff had the land validly allocated to it. He, on that strength, restrained the FCDA from reallocating the plots (land) to other people on the ground that the right of the owners is still extant having not been revoked, thereby voided the purported reallocation done by the FCDA during the pendency of the suit.

    The judge held that the plaintiff violated Section 30 (1) of the Nigeria Urban and Regional Planning Act, by failing to produce building permit indicating the engineering design, drawings, and environmental impact report.

    Justice Senchi upheld the argument of the defendants to the effect that the “stop work” red markings on the walls of the buildings were notices of unauthorised development.

    The judge refused to award the N5 billion damages prayed for by the subscribers.

    The seeming midway disposition of the judgment has raised issues, which many observers said, could create the impression that there was a deliberate policy of the state to deny the people access to livable houses.

    This, they said, may have informed the refusal of the court to fault what now appears a predilection on the part of the FCTA , to demolish completed projects on the simple reason that Abuja  Master Plan is being violated.

    They observed that it has become a pattern among FCDA officials to watch people commit huge funds to erecting structures only to turn around later and demolish them, with the same excuses of either violation of the master plan or lack of approval.

    They wondered why the state, with all the security agencies at its disposal, could not prevent the attendant waste of funds and efforts in cases of demolition, by restraining private developers at the early stage if they realised that something was amiss.

    They noted the disincentive in demolition, particularly the economic waste that results from the demolition of structures, on which huge funds had been invested, only on the ground that approvals were not obtained.

    To them, the FCDA and the FCTA should be proactive and not reactive. They should learn that it is better to prevent than destroy. They advised the authorities to devise a proactive mechanism to monitor infractions as against its weather beaten reactive approach that results mostly in waste.

  • Firm eyes mobile young men

    A real estate firm, Grand Sage Homes Limited, has promised to include upward mobile young people and medium level earners in its next housing scheme in the Lekki corridor of Lagos State.

    Its General Manager, Akinwale Roy Ojomo, at a briefing at the firm’s corporate office in Lekki Phase I, said those in the categories be considered deserve to have affordable houses.

    Although the firm serves all, young people who want to stay close to their places of work are those in focus.

    “Our products cut across different demography; we have the young upward mobile, who want to live very close to their place of work, our estate is located very close to Elegushi Beach. And for those who work on Victoria Island, Lekki, Ikoyi,” Ojomo said.

    He said the firm owns Almond Court and Matrix Estates. “We are the owners of the Almond Court Estate located within the Alma Beach Estate by Lekki Phase I and Matrix Homes at the Royal Garden Estate. Our core business is to build and develop luxury real estate at affordable prices.”

    The firm’s latest products, located very close to Elegushi Beach, he said, consider everyone in the society. “We are at the forefront of developing mansions, triplexes, duplexes, flats etc.,” he said.

    Ojomo said the firm’s plan for the future include having a weekend open house parley where potential house owners and subscribers to the firm’s scheme would be invited to site to see how work is progressing and how their dream houses are being built.

    Conducting reporters on a tour of their site, Ojomo said the range of houses being built by the firm would address largely acute housing needs of those working on the Victoria Island, Lekki and Ajah axis of Lagos.

    The project, which he said would be completed by 2015, has various units that would sit comfortably well on a six-acre space of land. “We are giving attention to space whereby prospective owners would enjoy wider space for their families. We are first concentrating on the first 24 units comprising triplexes and duplexes after which we would shift attention to the other wing. We are equally going to build our houses to form a blind alley or cul-de-sac of some sort. Everyone would live in a close-knit setting,” he said.

    The road to the estate, made with paved stones, is nearing completion while construction work is ongoing.

    “We are providing all infrastructures that would be needed in this estate just as we have done in our other estates. Not only that, we are going to maintain the facilities provided and ensure that our customers have the best in terms of services,” he said.

    The firm, Ojomo said, is set to start a column in the print media dedicated to educating Nigerians on property education and other issues relating to the construction industry.

    “This, apart from forming a property club aimed at educating members, would help in educating and spreading much needed information about housing to teeming Nigerians who need them,” he said.

  • Why PPP fails, by expert

    The President of the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS), Agele Alufohai has said deficiency in procurement and poor project packaging are the major causes of the failure of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs).

    Alufohai, in his goodwill message to the 25th Biennial Conference/ General Meeting with the theme: Nigeria’s quest for investment and growth: Releasing the potential of construction sector public private partnership, held at the International Conference Centre, Abuja, disclosed that Nigeria has not properly initiated many PPP projects, despite the need for infrastructure.

    Noting that PPP can make a significant contribution to wealth creation and improve the living conditions of Nigerians, the NIQS chief said the problem with PPP in Nigeria can be eradicated when governments, investors and professional associations work together to enhance the governance of the projects.

    He said: “PPP could help to reduce corruption in infrastructure procurement, because many parties are involved; the government, developers, financiers, users rather than just government and contractors that are involved in government procurement.”

  • Group urges govt to fix road

    A group, Ilorin Emirate Development Progressive Union (IEDPU), has urged the Federal Government to fix the Jebba–Bode Saadu-Ilorin Road in Kwara State.

    The IEDPU in a statement by its National President, Justice Saka Yusuf, lamented the uncountable number of lives and property that had been lost on the road over the years.

    The road, which links the Southwest with the Northcentral state, the group said, is in bad shape and has become a deathtrap.

    Armed robbers, according to the group, also wreak havoc on the road, dispossessing motorists and passengers of their valuables.

    It also urged the government to start the rehabilitation of the road in the New Year.

    The Sultan of Sokoto, Alh Sa’ad Abubakar had, during a meeting of the Inter-Religious Committee (NIREC) in Ilorin, Kwara State, drawn the attention of President Goodluck Jonathan to the deplorable condition of the road.

  • Ogun to help property owners regularise particulars

    The Ogun State Government has initiated steps to enhance infrastructural development of the state. It has introduced the Homeowners’ Charter Programme aimed at enabling homeowners regularise the legal status and documentation of their properties.

    The scheme, according to a statement from the state Ministry of Urban and Physical Planning, will apart from forming an integral part of the government’s mission to rebuild the state, provide data for the medium-term planning for provision of roads, schools, hospitals and other essential services.

    The statement said further that it will enable owners of properties build without government approval regularise their title documents through a window of opportunity to obtain building plan approval and certificates of occupancy. “All penalties and fees would be waived while fees are discounted to enable a large percentage of residents benefit,” it said.

    The GIS Satellite mapping of the state, the ministry said, revealed significant numbers of unrecorded properties, while thousands of houses in the state have no building plan approval, certificate of occupancy and other title documents

    The statement said: “It is expected that properties with regularised documents will benefit from Ogun State Governments’ urban renewal policy through effective planning of facilities in the areas of education, health and other essential infrastructure. It will also minimise disputes of ownership of properties while property related fraud and problems of land speculators are reduced to the barest minimum.The Homeowners’ Charter Programme will also enhance the value of the property market in the state.”

    The statement, however, categorise some properties as those that are not eligible for participation in the Homeownerships’ Charter Programme. They are: Properties built under Power Holding Company of Nigeria’s (PHCN) high tension cable, those built on the government’s acquired land, property occupying right of way of Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) pipelines, property built on flood plains and a host of others that contravened the law.

    Residents are urged to take advantage of the Homeowners’ Charter aimed at allowing them to regularise the titles of their properties at reduced cost.